It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Canada Pledges to Sell Oil to Asia After Obama Rejects Keystone Pipeline

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


They do have people who will lease them land, however a few do not want to and its their right to say no. Currently there are 56 lawsuits against landowners who are refusing to lease their land. Basically a Canadian company is using lawsuits and eminent domain to take American land. 90 percent of landowners have lease agreements the other 10% are being sued to give in.

www.nytimes.com...


As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Immune
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


They do have people who will lease them land, however a few do not want to and its their right to say no. Currently there are 56 lawsuits against landowners who are refusing to lease their land. Basically a Canadian company is using lawsuits and eminent domain to take American land. 90 percent of landowners have lease agreements the other 10% are being sued to give in.

www.nytimes.com...


As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)


Could it be that those land owners are just too greedy? They want more money than the neighbors?

Humans are humans after all.

As for the jobs, the company will hire maintenance crews all along the route. Those new jobs will stimulate the local barbers, restaurants, mechanics, etc. What's not to like about that?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SrWingCommander
He rejected it because he hates the energy companies......pure and simple. He set out (outlined in his book) to take down coal....oil I think is just a bonus.

Get ready for 5 bucks a gallon.


You're So Very Correct,,,,,,
Obama wanted gas prices High and Higher Than They Are Now.
Remember in 2008 and gas prices went up and back down again , then Obama and his wrecking crew went to work and it's been $3. and above every sense? Here I'll remind you.

While campaigning for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama spoke to the $4 a gallon gasoline prices Americans were facing by making it clear he had no problem with gas prices at that level. He simply “would have preferred a gradual adjustment” toward that price. In other words, he wasn’t bothered that gasoline hit $4 a gallon, just that it did so too quickly.





And the news gets worse. There's actually a Harvard study floating around, the findings of which demonstrate that Obama's real goal in denying us new oil supplies is to drive gas prices up to $7 a gallon.

www.hyscience.com...

Proof of way obama has denied Americans Jobs and Cheaper Fuel Cost.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Immune

As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)


... and the cornell study says 2000 yearjobs (meaning around 1000 temporary jobs for 2 years)
www.ilr.cornell.edu...

If you look at the vid on the other page even fox started out with 2.200 and has now reached "millions"
But you really don't have to be an expert to see that 20k and 250k numbers are absurd.


A construction management study (testing) carried out by the firm Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall in association with Mark Lehner and other Egyptologists, estimates that the total project required an average workforce of 14,567 people and a peak workforce of 40,000

en.wikipedia.org...

So with 250.000 people you could build 18 great pyramids, without using modern equipment.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by Immune

As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)


... and the cornell study says 2000 yearjobs (meaning around 1000 temporary jobs for 2 years)
www.ilr.cornell.edu...

If you look at the vid on the other page even fox started out with 2.200 and has now reached "millions"
But you really don't have to be an expert to see that 20k and 250k numbers are absurd.


A construction management study (testing) carried out by the firm Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall in association with Mark Lehner and other Egyptologists, estimates that the total project required an average workforce of 14,567 people and a peak workforce of 40,000

en.wikipedia.org...

So with 250.000 people you could build 18 great pyramids, without using modern equipment.


Too bad no one needs a pyramid these days.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnightFire

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by Immune

As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)


... and the cornell study says 2000 yearjobs (meaning around 1000 temporary jobs for 2 years)
www.ilr.cornell.edu...

If you look at the vid on the other page even fox started out with 2.200 and has now reached "millions"
But you really don't have to be an expert to see that 20k and 250k numbers are absurd.


A construction management study (testing) carried out by the firm Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall in association with Mark Lehner and other Egyptologists, estimates that the total project required an average workforce of 14,567 people and a peak workforce of 40,000

en.wikipedia.org...

So with 250.000 people you could build 18 great pyramids, without using modern equipment.


Too bad no one needs a pyramid these days.


... but the claim that digging in this 78 inch pipe will put more people to work than 18 grand pyramids did in the bronze age`(Or, if you go with the "more than a million" of fox 71+) doesn't make you doubt those numbers?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   
I have to laugh at all the people who scream about oil and where is it going .... The sad truth is that it doesn't matter who produces that oil in the western world it is a "world commodity" and it is laughable. The "drill baby drill" crowd just doesn't get it .... if we "drill baby drill" the oil doesn't go to the US but on the open market ... for sale to anyone who has the cash or today gold .....

we have reached "peak oil" and there is no going back ..... even if there is plenty of oil in the ground the peak oil I speak of is the marketplace where companies have created a bottleneck in the supply and distribution channel ...

the evidence is obivous ......



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by KnightFire

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by Immune

As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)


... and the cornell study says 2000 yearjobs (meaning around 1000 temporary jobs for 2 years)
www.ilr.cornell.edu...

If you look at the vid on the other page even fox started out with 2.200 and has now reached "millions"
But you really don't have to be an expert to see that 20k and 250k numbers are absurd.


A construction management study (testing) carried out by the firm Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall in association with Mark Lehner and other Egyptologists, estimates that the total project required an average workforce of 14,567 people and a peak workforce of 40,000

en.wikipedia.org...

So with 250.000 people you could build 18 great pyramids, without using modern equipment.


Too bad no one needs a pyramid these days.


... but the claim that digging in this 78 inch pipe will put more people to work than 18 grand pyramids did in the bronze age`(Or, if you go with the "more than a million" of fox 71+) doesn't make you doubt those numbers?


If you read my first post, I said 100s of thousands, not millions and 100s of thousands could equal 101,000, not the 250,000 you claim will build 18 great pyramids. What it comes down to is...Americans need jobs and one would figure the President would support jobs for the American people.
edit on 20-1-2012 by KnightFire because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Does everyone assume they know all the facts on the issue ?
1. 3 major oil companys are involved in the keystone project, Shell , Valareo, and Conoco which are not only based in Texas but have the ports to ship it and the refinerys of which Saudi Arabia has a finacial interest, (which means cost control, and I don't mean low cost) So the oil companys will sell to the highest bidder,be it the U.S. or China ( Texas and oil, kinda goes together like peanut butter and jelly)
2. One third of th pipeline is in Canada, which means american workers (may) get two third of the jobs !
3.There are already pipelines in, going from Canada to Illinois and Oklahoma.
4. Jobs? The estimites range from ( the oil companys ( 10 to 20 thousand) to research studys that say ( 4 to 6 thousand) The economy is hurting and people need the work. But for how long ? 2 maybe 3 years ?
The only big money makers will not be America, the states, or the workers, but oil and gas companys, as if they need more money with their record breaking profits over the last severl years, and if you think the pipeline will bring lower gas prices your crazy. And their profits will be alot longer than 2 or 3 years.
5.The oil that would be pumped through the keystone pipe is not regular oil it will be a very highly toxic mixture that contains elements that extracts oil from sand, mixed with the oil.
The pipeline will operate under high pressure which will mean a normal break in the line under high pressure could lead to an explosion on top of a big toxic spill, long before it could be turned off , don't forget where the pipe line goes , through americas bread basket farmland.(Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas.) Who's going pay for the clean up and who's gonna reimburse the farmers for damaged and lost crops, who's gonna reimburse the oil companys for lost oil and income ?
The same ones who are gonna pay for higher priced gas and food, taxpayers and consumers.
I do not support the president just supplying a few facts before we rush in .
edit on 20-1-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnightFire

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by KnightFire

Originally posted by narwahl

Originally posted by Immune

As for job creation the company says 20k new jobs the commerce department says 250k I would take the companies word for it and say 250k jobs the commerce department's estimate seems steep.

www.cbsnews.com...
edit on 1/20/2012 by Immune because: (no reason given)


... and the cornell study says 2000 yearjobs (meaning around 1000 temporary jobs for 2 years)
www.ilr.cornell.edu...

If you look at the vid on the other page even fox started out with 2.200 and has now reached "millions"
But you really don't have to be an expert to see that 20k and 250k numbers are absurd.


A construction management study (testing) carried out by the firm Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall in association with Mark Lehner and other Egyptologists, estimates that the total project required an average workforce of 14,567 people and a peak workforce of 40,000

en.wikipedia.org...

So with 250.000 people you could build 18 great pyramids, without using modern equipment.


Too bad no one needs a pyramid these days.


... but the claim that digging in this 78 inch pipe will put more people to work than 18 grand pyramids did in the bronze age`(Or, if you go with the "more than a million" of fox 71+) doesn't make you doubt those numbers?


If you read my first post, I said 100s of thousands, not millions and 100s of thousands could equal 101,000, not the 250,000 you claim will build 18 great pyramids.


actually .... "100s" means several instances of "100" If I gave you 100$ and 1 Cent you wouldn't claim I gave you hundreds of dollars, even though the amount was over 100. Actually If I gave you 200$ you wouldn't claim that.
I am glad you see that the more than a million thing is ridiculous.
But 100.000 is just as ridiculous (Thats 7 great pyramids, or 60 jobs per mile of pipe laid)
This pipeline would create hundreds of jobs (something around 20)
But guess what: so did Solyndra.(1.100 employees)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnightFire
Because of the 100s of thousands of jobs this pipeline can create,


I'm sorry, 100s of thousands of jobs? That's not true and was an exaggeration by employees of the oil companies... I mean the Republican party.

Derek



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
The pipeline if built would only allow the oil to be pumped to Texas then shipped across the world. Canada is in a snit because it would be cheaper for them to ship to Texas.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Rook1545
 


No, it was the Republicans.


edit on 20-1-2012 by Throwback because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Viesczy

Originally posted by KnightFire
Because of the 100s of thousands of jobs this pipeline can create,


I'm sorry, 100s of thousands of jobs? That's not true and was an exaggeration by employees of the oil companies... I mean the Republican party.

Derek


Whatever, like I actually made up this number. I'm only the messenger and I posted the article and other information stating the claim of 100s of thousands of jobs.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
S&F It's about gosh darn time SOMEONE stepped up. Too bad it wasn't OUR POTUS. SOOOOO freakin sad
He is SOOOOOOOO Lame



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
If I owned land that the pipeline was proposed to pass through, I would lease in a heartbeat. It’s a gamble of course, as it may be my land that has a break in the pipe. But if leasing provided extra income for me and my family, that is a risk I would gladly take.


If there was an aquifer under your land that supplied clean water to many thousands of people in the surrounding area, they might not feel the same way. Just because you may own the land doesn't give you the right to gamble with the clean water supply of others just for the sake of personal financial gain.

Sounds like a; "I got mine, screw everybody else, mentality" if you ask me. I for one, am glad that you're not my neighbor.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Why does our country hate solutions? God damn you Obama.....This would of been a great starting point in the attempt to break away from middle eastern oil....



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
 


Very True!

It has already been stated that if the pipeline was built, the oil from the gulf refineries would be shipped out of the country.

We are now shipping refined gasoline out of the gulf refineries, since we have a surplus.

Need to keep those prices up so the oil companies can make those big profits.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by KnightFire
 

Steve is already crying because opposition up here is lining up for the public hearings. He carries on about 'foreign interests' putting effort into the resistance, never minding the 'foreign interests' that are promoting it. Typical of him.



posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by jhn7537
Why does our country hate solutions? God damn you Obama.....This would of been a great starting point in the attempt to break away from middle eastern oil....


That's about the dumbest thing I ever heard. FYI, The primary export for the port of Houston much like the port of Corpus Christi, (where I worked for over 30 yrs.) is refined oil products, like gasoline. In the port of Corpus Christi, (6th largest in the nation in terms of cargo tonnage.) over 85% of all exports are gasoline and other fuel oil products.

en.wikipedia.org...



The top 10 commodities traded in 2009 are as follows:[10]

Rank Inbound Outbound
1 Crude Oil Gasoline
2 Fuel Oil Fuel Oil
3 Gas Oil Diesel
4 Bauxite Feed Stock
5 Feed Stock Wheat
6 Naphtha Alumina
7 Condensate Gas Oil
8 Reformate Cumene
9 Slop and Slurry Asphalt
10 Aggregate-Vulcan Xylene


Once the oil is refined, it's headed for the world markets and any effects it may have with respect to U.S. gasoline prices and/or energy independence will be minimal at best. This entire project is about "Big Oil" and their never ending quest to rake in more money. If we truly want energy independence then we should be investing in new clean energy technologies and not pipelines that run across our aquifers.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join